RE: Berkeley DB...
| От | Mikheev, Vadim |
|---|---|
| Тема | RE: Berkeley DB... |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 8F4C99C66D04D4118F580090272A7A23018BF8@SECTORBASE1 обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Berkeley DB... ("Mikheev, Vadim" <vmikheev@SECTORBASE.COM>) |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
> > Yes, that was one of my questions. Why use recno at all? > > We already have heap access which is very fast. Why switch > > to SDB which gives us a recno ordering of heap that doesn't > > do us any real good, except to allow tuple update without > > changing indexes. > > But if we'll use our heap AM, then we'll have to implement redo/undo > for it... no sence to switch to SDB for btree/hash WAL support -:) Also, I think that our native index logging will require less space in log, because of we can do not write *key values* to log! Index tuple insertion will be logged as "index tuple pointing to heap TID was added to page BLKNO at position ITEMID". The same for index page split... Vadim
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: